1. Field of the Invention
The present invention relates generally to vacuum cleaners, and more particularly, to a vacuum apparatus especially adapted to clean swimming pools containing water.
2. Description of the Prior Art
Swimming pools accumulate debris over a period of time. Some of the debris is cleaned from the pool water as the water is recycled and filtered. Other debris sinks to the bottom of the pool and is not cleaned during water recycling and filtration. To clean the debris that sinks to the bottom of the pool, a swimming pool vacuum cleaner may be employed.
One form of swimming pool vacuum cleaner makes use of the swimming pool filter assembly. That is, normal connections of the swimming pool filter assembly are altered, and a long vacuum hose is attached to the filter. The vacuum hose is then used for vacuuming the pool. Moreover, the vacuum produced by the filter assembly may be insufficient unless the filter is backwashed. This requires additional time and effort. After the pool is vacuumed, the vacuum hose is disconnected, and the filter is returned to normal. These alterations to the filter system are time consuming and inconvenient. Moreover, the repetitive disassembly and reassembly of filter connections imposes unwanted wear and tear on the filter components. In this respect, it would be desirable to vacuum the pool without using the pool filter apparatus.
A number of swimming pool vacuum cleaners are disclosed in the prior art. For example, the following U.S. patents disclose swimming pool vacuum cleaner apparatus: U.S. Pat. Nos. 3,868,739 of Hargrave; 4,240,173 of Sherrill; 4,637,086 of Goode; 4,718,129 of Miller; and 4,962,559 of Shuman.
The patents to Sherrill, Goode, and Miller disclose devices which employ a vacuum source outside the pool and provide a vacuum hose running from the vacuum source to the bottom of the pool. The devices disclosed in these patents avoid any potential problems that might result if water and electricity were to mix. Yet, a disadvantage of these devices is that a large and heavy vacuum hose must be employed. Use of such a large and heavy vacuum hose is undesirable for a number of reasons. Much physical effort must be expended to unwind the hose, use the hose, and rewind the hose. The hose is susceptible to rotting and leaking, thereby reducing its effectiveness. A large hose requires quite a bit of storage space when the hose is not being used. It would be desirable, therefore, if a swimming pool vacuum apparatus were provided which avoided the use of a vacuum hose running from a vacuum source outside the pool to the bottom of the pool.
The patents to Hargrave and Shuman disclose swimming pool vacuum cleaners that avoid the use of long vacuum hoses by using submersible vacuum pumps. The vacuum pump in the Shuman patent is a cordless electric pump. A disadvantage of the Shuman device is that its effective use time is limited by the charge retained in its rechargeable batteries. In this respect, it would be desirable if an immersible swimming pool vacuum apparatus were provided which is not limited by a charge retained by rechargeable batteries.
The patent to Hargrave discloses a swimming pool vacuum cleaner which employs an electrical cord running from an immersible vacuum unit to a source of electricity, e.g. an AC outlet, outside the pool. It is well known that electricity and water do not mix. In this respect it does not appear that special provisions have been made with the Hargrave device to prevent electricity from being conducted from the underwater portions of the device to a person, outside the pool, using the device.
More specifically with respect to the Hargrave device, and generally with respect to immersible vacuum cleaners, it would be desirable if electrical protection were provided to protect a person outside the pool, who is using the underwater portion of the device, from electric shock or electrocution in the event that a short circuit develops in the underwater portion of the device.
The protection from electrical shock could take a number of forms. The protection could be an electrical protection device in the electric circuit powering the immersible vacuum cleaner. In addition, the protective device could take the form of means for electrically isolating the person outside the pool from the electrical portions of the device that are immersed in the pool water.
Aside from pool vacuuming, another chore associated with a swimming pool is the addition of appropriate chemicals to the pool. Generally, pool vacuuming is deemed to be one maintenance operation, and adding chemicals is deemed to be another maintenance operation. In this respect, it would be desirable if the pool vacuuming operation and the chemical addition operation could be combined into a single operation.
Another problems associated with swimming pool vacuum cleaners relates to the handle that is held by the operator outside the pool for controlling the vacuum unit located at the bottom of the pool. Such a handle must have a long effective length. Yet a long handle is very inconvenient when the unit must be stored when not in use. In this respect, it would be desirable to provide a handle for a swimming pool vacuum cleaner that is small and compact during storage, but that is sufficiently long when the handle is in use.
Thus, while the foregoing body of prior art indicates it to be well known to use immersible swimming pool vacuum cleaners, the prior art described above does not teach or suggest an immersible swimming pool vacuum apparatus which is not limited by a charge retained by rechargeable batteries and which provides electrical protection to protect a person outside the pool, who is using the underwater portion of the device, from electric shock or electrocution in the event that a short circuit develops in the underwater portion of the device. The prior art does not provide an electrical protection device in the electric circuit powering the immersible vacuum cleaner. Neither does the prior art provide means for electrically isolating the person outside the pool from the electrical portions of the device that are immersed in the pool water. Also, the prior art does not provide combining the pool vacuuming operation and the chemical addition operation into a single operation. In addition, the prior art does not provide a handle for a swimming pool vacuum cleaner that is small and compact during storage, but that is sufficiently long when the handle is in use. The foregoing disadvantages are overcome by the unique swimming pool vacuum apparatus of the present invention as will be made apparent from the following description thereof. Other advantages of the present invention over the prior art also will be rendered evident.